Flying Crane said:
OK, there's one vote for the lefties. I still don't believe there is a "right side" for a technique, tho.
Over the years there have been significant misconceptions regarding the efficacy of right and left side training. A great deal of discussion exists relative to whether forms performances, and self-defense techniques are or should be right, left, or balanced in teaching and training execution.
The simple truth is all are correct in certain respects, and the confusion like many other topics, comes from the progenitor himself. Mr. Parker spent a considerable amount of time looking into the concept and reached some rather interesting conclusions in our own research and discussions.
As a forms example, in most versions of Ed Parkers Short Form Two, it does indeed include the physical left side in its right side presentation. But, it is still considered, by Ed Parkers definition, to be the right side, or what he quietly called right side brain dominant. However you do not reverse the synaptic and cerebellar pathway responsibilities for movement until the mirror image is performed.
This is what Parker meant by left side. The physical left is only motion or movement, but the true left side is an opposite or reversal of brain dominance and control. Thus all forms encompass in some manner right and left side, but to begin from the opposite side or mirror image reverses all mental functions and changes muscle response significantly enough to have significant influence on function.
Whether this is necessary in teaching is dependent on how you teach or train. Ed Parker created a series of conceptually right-handed techniques. He himself was not ambidextrous, nor was he working to become that way. His goal was physical self-defense competency in the interaction of the activity. And those who borrow sport concepts like cross training seem to put more value into ambidexterity than those who concentrate on self-defense as he did.
Although in his commercial schools he encouraged left & right training for a variety of reasons, he recognized in self defense, competence was more important than performing left and right equally well. He knew that practicing both sides can yield benefits, but he also knew right & left would never be equal. Either way the operative phrase is "mirror image execution, to activate both sides of the brain to create balance in any kind of physical training."
In Ed Parkers self-defense philosophy however, training should be based on a curriculum of well thought out systematically principled and progressive techniques. The mechanisms inherent in the process are designed to emphasize
situational effectiveness with ambidexterity irrelevant to function. Movements should be performed on both sides to demonstrate effective basic skills generated by both sides of the brain with their own unique synaptic pathways.
But, self-defense techniques are about competence and effectiveness within the sequence first, and emphasis must be place there as the top priority.
Of course basic skills should be raised to an acceptable level of effectiveness, but the goal of balance in the execution of self-defense techniques in their mirror image is unnecessary, time consuming, and not physically possible when it comes to equity.
The teachers who preach this both sides technique execution perspective, themselves are not equally proficient on both sides. Most traditional styles and disciplines and even western boxing have techniques and moves used
only from the left or right side.
Most styles promote a left side forward to allow use of the right (strong) hand and leg from the rear. Even when the techniques, change they still favor the right side. Even in those schools that promote equal side proficiency it is never, nor is it possible to actually be achieved. The reasons it is not possible are physiological involving a mental interaction with the bodys ability to perform.
Each side of the body is controlled by opposite sides of the brain. For example, when learning a left kick, a synaptic pathway must be created, or established through the right side of the brain and vice versa. No matter how you train, the left and right pathways will never be identical in function. Even though the two sides of the brain function together, they do not have identical ways of performing the same function.
They may produce identical physical movement, but how the movements are produced and controlled from the brain are very different. Additionally the human body is not mathematically symmetrical in the true sense of the term. It is normal in human anatomy for one leg or arm to be longer than the other, and even different in diameter. Every muscle, tendon, cartilage, and even hair growth varies from side to side. World-class athletes do not stride, jump, throw, or move the same on both sides of the body.
What is even more interesting is when an athlete is trained to be exactly symmetrical in their execution; it has been shown that physical
performance actually declines overall. The body may be visually aesthetically symmetrical, but not precisely physically or mathematically.
Most have unreasonable expectations with regard to weak side performance.
If we anticipate we can train the weak side to perform equally with the strong, we are mistaken. Because of how the brain works, you cannot attain the exact same degree of skill on both sides. It would be like attempting to teach yourself to write equally as well with both hands. You may achieve an acceptable level on the weak side but the strong will always be better and dominant. Human beings have a natural physical preference to have a dominant side that is predetermined at birth.
Even in cases where a person has activity dedicated dominance, they are always opposite of each other. I have a student who writes on one side, throws on the other, and still in baseball, bats opposite his dominant throwing side. But these activities are still functionally dedicated. He cant write, bat, or throw equally with both. This dominance is so strong in human behavior; it cannot be overcome by external training.
In the Chinese Martial Science, students are taught opposite most other later martial art disciplines with the strong side forward for practicality. In examining the basic idea of most techniques, they can be executed on the prescribed side or they can be executed in what Mr. Parker, called "Half Mirror Image." That is, a technique may be designed for one side attacking, however just because the attacker uses the other side or mirror, doesnt mean you have to react in kind with a mirrored response.
The self-defense techniques "Thrusting Salute" and "Buckling Branch" as kicking defenses are both interchangeable whether the right or left kick is used in the attack. In "Thrusting Salute" the attack is a front kick with the right leg, and you respond with the prescribed Default Solution to that particular assault. When the attack of a left front kick is used in "Buckling Branch," the attacker is now using the Mirror Image Assault of Thrusting Salute. However if you respond with the Default Solution to "Thrusting
Salute," you are in a Half Mirror Image Solution response. These attacks, although mirror opposites of each other, can be responded to with the exact same right-handed response.
This type of training only requires one side be developed significantly to be functional. The opposite side can and will also be developed, but performing a different function. In another example, in the attack for "Delayed Sword" (a right hand), you defend by stepping back with the left foot and executing with your front (right) hand. Attacking Mace (again an attacking right
hand), does just the opposite, defending by stepping back with the right foot. Both techniques are developed independent of each other on opposite sides of the body, but they both function quite well with either right or left side dominance.
Although all of Parkers interpretations of his art tend to be right-handed, students with left-handed dominance can, and do flourish. But no matter how well you perform in symmetrical forms, the dominant side will always be more coordinated and controlled. However, in a fight or confrontation of significant stress, and given the choice, you will always have a preference for one side over the other.
In closing, remember all interpretations of Ed Parkers American Kenpo should be about self-defense first. Many, specifically in America, have confused, through clever marketing, sport training with self-defense training. Cross training and symmetrical performance borrowed from sport training and tradition-laden disciplines, must take a back seat to practical function and applications in reality.
For the same reasons of symmetrical dominance, with the addition of mechanical efficiency, please consider any passive non-action while opposite body parts are moving as dysfunctional in human anatomical movement, and violates this balanced perspective of anatomical movement as well.
The Ed Parker euphamistically used "Slap-Check" (or pak sao in Chinese), and all its many subcategories and functions are always in some manner active. There are never 'passive' hands in human movement, which negates the 'Positional Check" as dysfunctional. To achieve certain balanced skills, it is imperative that both sides of the body be active and functional at all times, and never ever passive.
True ambidexterity is a myth and although it is worthy of pursuit, it should not overshadow the quest for practical application first. They dont 'fight' in tournaments they 'compete.' On the street, right or left is irrelevant to survival. You should be capable of using both sides of your body, but not necessarily the same way nor equal. Ed Parker was right handed, and so are the systems he created and influenced, but because of its design, 'lefties' do just as well.
.
